A quick addendum to my previous post, remember that it helps everyone if you keep up with the blog, read all of the posts, and comment any questions or impressions that you might have. I will comment on all of your individual posts, but one of the best ways to get additional feedback is for you to provide it for one another.
Also, class time is limited, so any issues or questions that you have in regards to your own or another student's paper topic should go on the blog. I check the blog throughout the week, so I'll comment on any "posts between posts" as needed.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Revised Topic
I apologize for the lateness of my post, I didn't have time to visit Hoover until just yesterday. Here is my original idea, with my additional thoughts after exploring the available sources.
Although my research question and thesis are not set in stone, I am operating under a general idea that hopefully can help me narrow down my focus as my research progresses. Basically, I want to frame the minority wartime experience with the theme of our class, identities. This would break down into two main facets: how are these minority soldiers perceived by those around them (i.e. their commanders and fellow soldiers, their community back home, other minority groups, etc.) and how do they perceive themselves (ties to their original home and culture versus ties to their adopted country, the United States.) What are they fighting for? Narrow concerns such as their family? Fear of being seen as 'un-American?' Unable to find a job, and so chose the army as a last resort? Or do they believe in the cause, believe that defending America and her democratic ideals are reason enough to volunteer? Of course the background of these soldiers would play an important part in my analysis. Are they first or second generation Americans? What was their life like growing up in this country?
After looking into available sources, I may have to adjust my focus towards the home front. Looking in the Hoover archives and the Mexican-American collection, I did find one promising collection about a Cuban-American literary scholar who also served as a Sgt. In World War II. However, the majority of his writings are in Spanish (which I do not speak). I am still interested in my original research questions, but I may need to adjust my focus if I cannot find a primary source documenting a soldier’s experience.
I think I may look closer at the experience of Mexican-Americans and Mexican immigrants in Los Angeles during the war years (1939-1945). I have found a source that focuses on these types of experiences in Southern California. Many of these immigrants were targets for violence, which erupted into the Zoot Suit Riots. I want to examine why such divisive racial tensions existed during the war years and how they affected Mexican-American perceptions of their newly adopted home country as well as their effect on American morale in general.
- Brendan
Although my research question and thesis are not set in stone, I am operating under a general idea that hopefully can help me narrow down my focus as my research progresses. Basically, I want to frame the minority wartime experience with the theme of our class, identities. This would break down into two main facets: how are these minority soldiers perceived by those around them (i.e. their commanders and fellow soldiers, their community back home, other minority groups, etc.) and how do they perceive themselves (ties to their original home and culture versus ties to their adopted country, the United States.) What are they fighting for? Narrow concerns such as their family? Fear of being seen as 'un-American?' Unable to find a job, and so chose the army as a last resort? Or do they believe in the cause, believe that defending America and her democratic ideals are reason enough to volunteer? Of course the background of these soldiers would play an important part in my analysis. Are they first or second generation Americans? What was their life like growing up in this country?
After looking into available sources, I may have to adjust my focus towards the home front. Looking in the Hoover archives and the Mexican-American collection, I did find one promising collection about a Cuban-American literary scholar who also served as a Sgt. In World War II. However, the majority of his writings are in Spanish (which I do not speak). I am still interested in my original research questions, but I may need to adjust my focus if I cannot find a primary source documenting a soldier’s experience.
I think I may look closer at the experience of Mexican-Americans and Mexican immigrants in Los Angeles during the war years (1939-1945). I have found a source that focuses on these types of experiences in Southern California. Many of these immigrants were targets for violence, which erupted into the Zoot Suit Riots. I want to examine why such divisive racial tensions existed during the war years and how they affected Mexican-American perceptions of their newly adopted home country as well as their effect on American morale in general.
- Brendan
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Response to week 4 posts
I was really pleased to read all of your blog posts this week. You've all clearly narrowed down your topics considerably within your larger fields of interest. As you know, tomorrow Ben Stone will be in class and will help all of you individually in locating primary sources based on these posts. Hopefully, this will solve some of the problems cited in the "troubleshooting" portion of the assignment.
In the meantime, a few comments:
Matt--I think that the idea of comparing the rhetoric of people writing in different colonies is a good one though access to sources may be a limiting factor to how extensively this can be done. I'd also caution that you see to be suggesting in your post that the rhetoric of slavery differs from the "true feelings" of revolutionary era writers. This may be so, but don't assume that rhetoric is divorced from private beliefs. Make sure to take the published writing that you read seriously, even where you believe that authors are exaggerating or stretching a metaphor to make a greater impact.
Andrea--It will probably be possible to find some media that contains comedy routines. Audience reaction may be more difficult, but I would worry less about being able to find at least some comedy routines. It will probably be necessary though for you to limit yourself to fewer comedians in order to make the source load more manageable. You might even just pick one or two comedians to work on. Since you mentioned separating male and female comedy, you might think about picking one female comedian or a couple of female comedians and thinking about how gender informs their views on the black family and marriage.
Chris--Since you are focusing at least in part of the earthquake and on cultural matters, you'll probably find a wealth of sources. I don't think it will be much of a hindrance for you to not read Chinese, but as always it entails reading sources carefully and understanding that many of the sources will be not so much about Chinese American culture but about how white people encounter and interpret this culture. Now, part of the question then becomes how this interpretation changes (or doesn't) in response to the dislocations caused by the earthquake. I'll be interested to see in particular what sources you can find at special collections at Stanford given that you've already worked through many of the resources on campus. It could really illustrate what kind of information a new angle or question can reveal even when it seems that you've found almost everything.
Sylvie--It occurred to me while reading your post that the Hoover also has papers of some prominent Jewish conservatives active in the 1960s and 1970s. Although this clearly isn't exactly where you're going, perhaps it would interest you to look through some of these papers to see how they encounter conservativism through the lens of their religious beliefs. Perhaps some of them also published articles in the National Review? Also, both you and Tom should read the book A Time for Choosing by Jonathan Schoenwald.
Tom--See the above book recommendation in Jenni's comments. Focusing on women is a great idea. Though you might not be able to find specific information about the migrations of many of these women, you probably will be able to find organizations or campaigns that were run predominantly by women or that concerned "women's issues." In addition to the above book recommendation, I'd also see Thomas Edsall and Mary Edsall, Chain Reaction: The Impact of Race, Rights and Taxes on American Politics. It has more information on busing and other issues that conservative women took up in large numbers.
Jenni--I won't say much since we spoke about this to some degree already. I'll just reiterate that images of the "new woman" may be both illustrative about what she is and what she is not. Images directed towards older women, who presumably are not "new women," can tell just as much about womanhood and contradictions that resulted from the cultural shift.
Alice--The story of how the Pinkertons became a large private police force in the late 19th century is one that I suspect has a great deal of regional variation. In other words, the history of the Pinkertons in the Bay Area will probably look very different from the history of the Pinkertons on the east coast. That said, I think even looking at once piece of the larger Pinkerton machine tie in to the narrative that you've laid out of the growth of private police action and violence for profit. I believe this has been said already, but I'd also point out that you're right to point out that the ethnicity of the Pinkertons and of the people who were the victims of their attention will be a factor in your analysis given that there may be conflicts between more newly arrived Irish, Italian, Eastern/Southern European and more established whites.
In the meantime, a few comments:
Matt--I think that the idea of comparing the rhetoric of people writing in different colonies is a good one though access to sources may be a limiting factor to how extensively this can be done. I'd also caution that you see to be suggesting in your post that the rhetoric of slavery differs from the "true feelings" of revolutionary era writers. This may be so, but don't assume that rhetoric is divorced from private beliefs. Make sure to take the published writing that you read seriously, even where you believe that authors are exaggerating or stretching a metaphor to make a greater impact.
Andrea--It will probably be possible to find some media that contains comedy routines. Audience reaction may be more difficult, but I would worry less about being able to find at least some comedy routines. It will probably be necessary though for you to limit yourself to fewer comedians in order to make the source load more manageable. You might even just pick one or two comedians to work on. Since you mentioned separating male and female comedy, you might think about picking one female comedian or a couple of female comedians and thinking about how gender informs their views on the black family and marriage.
Chris--Since you are focusing at least in part of the earthquake and on cultural matters, you'll probably find a wealth of sources. I don't think it will be much of a hindrance for you to not read Chinese, but as always it entails reading sources carefully and understanding that many of the sources will be not so much about Chinese American culture but about how white people encounter and interpret this culture. Now, part of the question then becomes how this interpretation changes (or doesn't) in response to the dislocations caused by the earthquake. I'll be interested to see in particular what sources you can find at special collections at Stanford given that you've already worked through many of the resources on campus. It could really illustrate what kind of information a new angle or question can reveal even when it seems that you've found almost everything.
Sylvie--It occurred to me while reading your post that the Hoover also has papers of some prominent Jewish conservatives active in the 1960s and 1970s. Although this clearly isn't exactly where you're going, perhaps it would interest you to look through some of these papers to see how they encounter conservativism through the lens of their religious beliefs. Perhaps some of them also published articles in the National Review? Also, both you and Tom should read the book A Time for Choosing by Jonathan Schoenwald.
Tom--See the above book recommendation in Jenni's comments. Focusing on women is a great idea. Though you might not be able to find specific information about the migrations of many of these women, you probably will be able to find organizations or campaigns that were run predominantly by women or that concerned "women's issues." In addition to the above book recommendation, I'd also see Thomas Edsall and Mary Edsall, Chain Reaction: The Impact of Race, Rights and Taxes on American Politics. It has more information on busing and other issues that conservative women took up in large numbers.
Jenni--I won't say much since we spoke about this to some degree already. I'll just reiterate that images of the "new woman" may be both illustrative about what she is and what she is not. Images directed towards older women, who presumably are not "new women," can tell just as much about womanhood and contradictions that resulted from the cultural shift.
Alice--The story of how the Pinkertons became a large private police force in the late 19th century is one that I suspect has a great deal of regional variation. In other words, the history of the Pinkertons in the Bay Area will probably look very different from the history of the Pinkertons on the east coast. That said, I think even looking at once piece of the larger Pinkerton machine tie in to the narrative that you've laid out of the growth of private police action and violence for profit. I believe this has been said already, but I'd also point out that you're right to point out that the ethnicity of the Pinkertons and of the people who were the victims of their attention will be a factor in your analysis given that there may be conflicts between more newly arrived Irish, Italian, Eastern/Southern European and more established whites.
Revised Research Statement
Sorry this is late - mixed up the due dates.
After a good amount of deliberation, I've decided that the topic I would like to pursue this quarter is my second one: anti-British Propaganda in Colonial America. More specifically, I'd like to engage the contradiction between the rhetoric of “enslavement” to Great Britain utilized by revolutionary forces before the outbreak of the revolutionary war and the practice of economic slavery that was common in the colonies. This is by no means an absolutely unique topic, but the angle with which I plan to tackle it should definitely provide some new insights into how the contradiction was born and thrived.
In a nutshell, here are the questions I want to answer: How much did the anti-British “slavery” rhetoric contrast with the actual philosophical positions of those espousing this rhetoric? How much was genuine, how much was used as a tool of manipulation? In spite of the obvious contradiction, “slavery” rhetoric was prominent in anti-British propaganda. Something about this rhetoric must have resonated strongly with the population that the propagandists were trying to mobilize, but why? Understanding why and how this rhetoric worked so well would provide a unique lens into understanding the psychology and political/moral philosophies of average Americans, the potential foot soldiers of revolution. It would help us understand more fully what truly made the revolution possible.
The primary sources I need to look into are rather obvious – first, I'd be looking at the actual pamphlets that were disseminated by organizations such as Sons of Liberty. I also want to find documents that express revolutionaries' views of economic slavery, and private letters in which they express their true feelings for Great Britain and to what extent the relationship between Great Britain and the United States constituted “slavery.” I haven't gone through a rigorous inventory of secondary sources yet, but I definitely want to look at Bernard Bailyn's Ideological Origins of the American Revolution and other sources that engage the issue of the rhetoric of slavery.
After evaluating my topic further, I feel like I have some good starting points for my research. Prof. Hobbs recommended some fantastic sources I plan on looking in to, and I'm going to talk to my adviser Prof. Rakove some time early next week.
One new idea that I've come up with is doing an analysis of how common "slavery" rhetoric was in from colony to colony. Was it used more in the South than in the North? Was the rhetoric used in a different way? I hope that I can find a variety of sources from different colonies, and also some sources that point to how prevalent slavery was in certain areas so I can see if there's anything to be found here.
I might also want to analyze the rhetoric's change over time, if there is significant change over time. Obviously I can't cover all of this, but I would like to do at least a little bit of research on all of it to see where the most interesting angles lie.
After a good amount of deliberation, I've decided that the topic I would like to pursue this quarter is my second one: anti-British Propaganda in Colonial America. More specifically, I'd like to engage the contradiction between the rhetoric of “enslavement” to Great Britain utilized by revolutionary forces before the outbreak of the revolutionary war and the practice of economic slavery that was common in the colonies. This is by no means an absolutely unique topic, but the angle with which I plan to tackle it should definitely provide some new insights into how the contradiction was born and thrived.
In a nutshell, here are the questions I want to answer: How much did the anti-British “slavery” rhetoric contrast with the actual philosophical positions of those espousing this rhetoric? How much was genuine, how much was used as a tool of manipulation? In spite of the obvious contradiction, “slavery” rhetoric was prominent in anti-British propaganda. Something about this rhetoric must have resonated strongly with the population that the propagandists were trying to mobilize, but why? Understanding why and how this rhetoric worked so well would provide a unique lens into understanding the psychology and political/moral philosophies of average Americans, the potential foot soldiers of revolution. It would help us understand more fully what truly made the revolution possible.
The primary sources I need to look into are rather obvious – first, I'd be looking at the actual pamphlets that were disseminated by organizations such as Sons of Liberty. I also want to find documents that express revolutionaries' views of economic slavery, and private letters in which they express their true feelings for Great Britain and to what extent the relationship between Great Britain and the United States constituted “slavery.” I haven't gone through a rigorous inventory of secondary sources yet, but I definitely want to look at Bernard Bailyn's Ideological Origins of the American Revolution and other sources that engage the issue of the rhetoric of slavery.
After evaluating my topic further, I feel like I have some good starting points for my research. Prof. Hobbs recommended some fantastic sources I plan on looking in to, and I'm going to talk to my adviser Prof. Rakove some time early next week.
One new idea that I've come up with is doing an analysis of how common "slavery" rhetoric was in from colony to colony. Was it used more in the South than in the North? Was the rhetoric used in a different way? I hope that I can find a variety of sources from different colonies, and also some sources that point to how prevalent slavery was in certain areas so I can see if there's anything to be found here.
I might also want to analyze the rhetoric's change over time, if there is significant change over time. Obviously I can't cover all of this, but I would like to do at least a little bit of research on all of it to see where the most interesting angles lie.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
refined research topic - andrea
Sorry for the delay in posting this – my Tuesdays are hectic!
I hope to carve out more on my topic when I meet with Professor Hobbs tomorrow, but here is a more refined look at my ideas, with particular attention on the Troubleshooting section:
What began with a desire to understand the history and crisis of marriage within the black community morphed into an exploration of how black relationship are depicted by performers – specifically black comedians.
Recently, many social scientists are considering the depleted number of healthy black marriages a sign of crisis for African Americans. But if we look back to the early 1900s, it becomes clear that this may not be a recent problem – the black family has faced challenges and changed drastically over the 20th century, often for the worse. Especially among the black community, it has become customary to laugh at what causes trouble or suffering. This technique is often employed by comedians with regard to racial situations, but also black love and relationship situations as well. It’s interesting that those topics can be both draw attention to a crisis, while at the same time engaging the audience. Such routines are too often disregarded as simply entertainment to poke fun at the black community’s marriage and relationship predicament. I want to probe further and evaluate if those jokes truly reflected the situation facing the black community at the time of the comedians routines, or whether they were exaggerations, or if they missed the mark.
Because I want my research to cover the bulk of the 20th century, I want to look at the comedic routines and personal lives of comedians throughout recent history, including Richard Pryor, Bill Cosby, Moms Mabley, Dick Gregory, Whoopie Goldberg, among others. Secondary source material could include critics’ responses to the comedians’ comments on black relationships.
The way I see my question right now (and it is very malleable if future resources present themselves), it is two pronged:
1. comedic routines
LINGERING QUESTIONS:
- Do I have the time or space to look at this as a comparison to white relationships and how they are depicted by white comedians (or comedians of other races)? As someone mentioned in class – there is not real equivalent to Bill Cosby (a huge black marriage advocate and comedian) in the white community. Then again, is there a need for one?
- Should I consider separating female from male comedians?
- What do the comedians think their audience is taking away from these kinds of routines?
TROUBLESHOOTING:
- I am concerned about finding primary sources other than comedic routines. I’d like to find letters, diaries, or other original materials from these performers, so I’d need some guidance about where to do look first.
- Where can I read and/or hear these routines, from a reliable source?
I hope to carve out more on my topic when I meet with Professor Hobbs tomorrow, but here is a more refined look at my ideas, with particular attention on the Troubleshooting section:
What began with a desire to understand the history and crisis of marriage within the black community morphed into an exploration of how black relationship are depicted by performers – specifically black comedians.
Recently, many social scientists are considering the depleted number of healthy black marriages a sign of crisis for African Americans. But if we look back to the early 1900s, it becomes clear that this may not be a recent problem – the black family has faced challenges and changed drastically over the 20th century, often for the worse. Especially among the black community, it has become customary to laugh at what causes trouble or suffering. This technique is often employed by comedians with regard to racial situations, but also black love and relationship situations as well. It’s interesting that those topics can be both draw attention to a crisis, while at the same time engaging the audience. Such routines are too often disregarded as simply entertainment to poke fun at the black community’s marriage and relationship predicament. I want to probe further and evaluate if those jokes truly reflected the situation facing the black community at the time of the comedians routines, or whether they were exaggerations, or if they missed the mark.
Because I want my research to cover the bulk of the 20th century, I want to look at the comedic routines and personal lives of comedians throughout recent history, including Richard Pryor, Bill Cosby, Moms Mabley, Dick Gregory, Whoopie Goldberg, among others. Secondary source material could include critics’ responses to the comedians’ comments on black relationships.
The way I see my question right now (and it is very malleable if future resources present themselves), it is two pronged:
1. comedic routines
LINGERING QUESTIONS:
- Do I have the time or space to look at this as a comparison to white relationships and how they are depicted by white comedians (or comedians of other races)? As someone mentioned in class – there is not real equivalent to Bill Cosby (a huge black marriage advocate and comedian) in the white community. Then again, is there a need for one?
- Should I consider separating female from male comedians?
- What do the comedians think their audience is taking away from these kinds of routines?
TROUBLESHOOTING:
- I am concerned about finding primary sources other than comedic routines. I’d like to find letters, diaries, or other original materials from these performers, so I’d need some guidance about where to do look first.
- Where can I read and/or hear these routines, from a reliable source?
Refined Research Statement
Specifics
In the aftermath of the Chinese immigrant influx and the resultant exclusion acts of the late 1800s, the remaining Chinese would play a major part in every-day life in the formation of early Bay Area history, particularly at Stanford University. Working as servants, cooks and janitors, or running laundries, the early students and residents of the university town would have interacted with the Chinese on a daily basis. How did the cultural interaction play a role in defining the Chinese to the Americans of the time, and vice-versa? Then-Manchu-ruled China dictated aspects of personal presentation and dress, which made the Chinese stand out among any population--sometimes incurring fascination, and other times bringing on ridicule or anger. At a time when many Chinese were discriminated against in big cities such as San Francisco, how did these race-relations play out in the context of the university and the surrounding towns? Based on my former research, the Chinese population declined drastically during the first two decades of the twentieth century, from a height around 1900. What caused this decline? My hypothesis is that the 1906 earthquake was responsible for the major shifts in population at the time, an I'd be interested in finding out if there were also concurrent shifts in perception of the Chinese and cultural interaction.
Significance
The connection between Stanford and the Chinese servants who worked for the senator before the founding of the university was something that didn’t occur to me until encountering some of the primary source documents. The work done by these Chinese immigrants helped start the school, and I think that filling in the background for the cultural aspect of Chinese-American relationships would fill in this gap in early university history. Looking at how the Chinese-American relations shifted during the turn of the century, and with the 1906 earthquake, would be more broadly applicable to race-relations during times of upheaval.
Troubleshooting
Well . . . I can't read Chinese. I'm going to be limited to using English documents, which may either give me a bias for relationships looking Eastward, or limit me to sources that have been translated. Since I'll be looking at American sources, this may not be such a big problem, although the issue of lack of material evidence may itself become a problem. I will also have to deal with small collections at diverse locations, but hopefully telephone and online contact will enable me to narrow down the more likely sources of information.
Sources
I intend to go back to the Census records that I began to look at last time in order to narrow down names and locations of Chinese servants in order to get new ideas of where, or who, to search. I'm also excited to go to the Chinese Historical Society in San Francisco, something I have yet to do during my interest in this subject, since I suspect that a lot of material, even if it doesn’t relate directly to Stanford, will be applicable to Chinese-American experiences of the time. Student letters and memoirs of the early years of Stanford University will also be very important. Green Library has a wealth of second-hand sources regarding the effect of the 1906 earthquake on the Bay Area in general, and since this wasn’t the focus of any of my interests before, this will probably provide quite a bit of information I have yet to see. Historical societies in Menlo Park and Palo Alto, and possibly Portola Valley, will also be valuable.
Refined Research statement - Sylvie
I will be researching William F. Buckley, Jr.'s personal religiosity (he was a devout Catholic). I want to examine the connection between his Catholicism and his creation of the modern conservative movement: how did his faith shape his social and political values that made up this movement? How did the fact that he was Catholic while most others in the modern conservative movement that he was spearheading were Protestant effect his work? Were there conflicts over his religion? Modern conservatism is not a Catholic movement by any means, but many of the values that WFB professed seemed linked in part to his religion. How can we consider the roots of the movement and different camps of Christianity?
I plan to use the Hoover Archive as extensively as possible, though I realize that some of the Buckely papers there are of a financial nature (i.e. are concerned with his book contracts and the like) rather than a personal nature. I think that I will have to look at the papers of Buckley's colleagues and correspondents in order to get primary source material on him at Hoover.
Of course I will also use Buckley's published writings, but am hoping to find some letters and papers that can give me an insight into his personal religiosity a little more. It was suggested to me by our writing fellow, Julie, that I might look at WFB Sr.'s papers to get information on WFB Jr.'s childhood and adolescence I will be researching William F. Buckley, Jr.'s personal religiosity (he was a devout Catholic). I want to examine the connection between his Catholicism and his creation of the modern conservative movement: how did his faith shape his social and political values that made up this movement? How did the fact that he was Catholic while most others in the modern conservative movement that he was spearheading were Protestant effect his work? Were there conflicts over his religion? Modern conservatism is not a Catholic movement by any means, but many of the values that WFB professed seemed linked in part to his religion. How can we consider the roots of the movement and different camps of Christianity?
I plan to use the Hoover Archive as extensively as possible, though I realize that some of the Buckely papers there are of a financial nature (i.e. are concerned with his book contracts and the like) rather than a personal nature. I think that I will have to look at the papers of Buckley's colleagues and correspondents in order to get primary source material on him at Hoover.
Of course I will also use Buckley's published writings, but am hoping to find some letters and papers that can give me an insight into his personal religiosity a little more. It was suggested to me by our writing fellow, Julie, that I might look at WFB Sr.'s papers to get information on WFB Jr.'s childhood and adolescence, and the role of religion in the Buckley family household.
I plan to use the Hoover Archive as extensively as possible, though I realize that some of the Buckely papers there are of a financial nature (i.e. are concerned with his book contracts and the like) rather than a personal nature. I think that I will have to look at the papers of Buckley's colleagues and correspondents in order to get primary source material on him at Hoover.
Of course I will also use Buckley's published writings, but am hoping to find some letters and papers that can give me an insight into his personal religiosity a little more. It was suggested to me by our writing fellow, Julie, that I might look at WFB Sr.'s papers to get information on WFB Jr.'s childhood and adolescence I will be researching William F. Buckley, Jr.'s personal religiosity (he was a devout Catholic). I want to examine the connection between his Catholicism and his creation of the modern conservative movement: how did his faith shape his social and political values that made up this movement? How did the fact that he was Catholic while most others in the modern conservative movement that he was spearheading were Protestant effect his work? Were there conflicts over his religion? Modern conservatism is not a Catholic movement by any means, but many of the values that WFB professed seemed linked in part to his religion. How can we consider the roots of the movement and different camps of Christianity?
I plan to use the Hoover Archive as extensively as possible, though I realize that some of the Buckely papers there are of a financial nature (i.e. are concerned with his book contracts and the like) rather than a personal nature. I think that I will have to look at the papers of Buckley's colleagues and correspondents in order to get primary source material on him at Hoover.
Of course I will also use Buckley's published writings, but am hoping to find some letters and papers that can give me an insight into his personal religiosity a little more. It was suggested to me by our writing fellow, Julie, that I might look at WFB Sr.'s papers to get information on WFB Jr.'s childhood and adolescence, and the role of religion in the Buckley family household.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)